Cases 21 - 30 of 93
Teral Sherman v. James S. Hill et al
as 2:2022cv04676
Plaintiff:
Teral Sherman
Defendant:
James S. Hill, M. Torres, D. Mortimer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Barillas v. Hill
as 5:2022cv02957
Petitioner:
Jose Humberto Barillas
Defendant:
James S. Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Jacome v. Hill et al
as 3:2022cv00546
Petitioner:
Alexander Jacome
Respondent:
James S. Hill, Gavin Newsom and Kathleen Allison
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
David Hill v. Riverside County
as 5:2022cv00253
Plaintiff:
David Hill and David S. Hill
Defendant:
Riverside County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
ISRAEL v. FOSKEY et al
as 4:2022cv00037
Plaintiff:
CONNIE RAY ISRAEL
Defendant:
D FOSKEY, RODGER, G CARTER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
ISRAEL v. DIXON et al
as 4:2022cv00016
Plaintiff:
CONNIE RAY ISRAEL
Defendant:
D FOSKEY, RODGER, G CARTER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Canela Cifuentes Catalan v. James S. Hill et al
as 5:2022cv00062
Plaintiff:
Canela Cifuentes Catalon
Defendant:
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA acting by and through THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION; a California Public Entity, Warden James S Hill, DOE OFFICER 1 and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Warner v. Brown et al
as 4:2021cv04102
Plaintiff:
Jason Christian Warner
Defendant:
Porscha Brown, S. Hill and Hilary Unger
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jonathan David Highley v. James S. Hill
as 2:2021cv07252
Petitioner:
Jonathan David Highley
Respondent:
James S. Hill
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
HARDESTY v. HILL et al
as 1:2021cv01129
Defendant:
JENNY REWERTS, CARLA ROSSELOT, Sgt. S. HILL and others
Plaintiff:
ROBERT LEO HARDESTY, JR.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
